THE STATUS OF THE SCHISM 

ON THE EVE OF MEDIATION

This is a crucial "in between" period in the history of the schism, between Judge Richard Gergel's orders of last Thursday (19 September) and the start of mediation this Thursday (26 September). Now is an appropriate moment to explore this question, What is the status of the schism on the eve of the new mediation?

There is a great deal to cover here, so I want to make this as concise and precise as possible.

JUDGE GERGEL'S ORDERS

Judge Richard Gergel issued three Orders on 19 September in the case of vonRosenberg v. Lawrence. There was the main decision, at 76 pages. It declared the Church diocese to be the legal heir of the historic Diocese of South Carolina and banned the breakaway parties from using the names and symbols of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina.

(It is important to note that this lawsuit involved only trademarks. It did not concern property. Thus, Gergel's primary Order did not address the disposition  of the properties of the old diocese such as Diocesan house, bishop's residence, endowments, bank accounts, furnishings, and the like. Presumably this will be a topic in the upcoming mediation. If not, I suppose a new lawsuit to recover the assets would be in order. It seems to me the Church diocese is entitled to the diocesan assets as of the moment of the schism---noon on 15 October 2012. The income and debts the breakaways incurred after that should be their own business.)

A second order of Gergel concerned the local parishes that purported to disassociate from the Episcopal Church. He ruled that these may continue using their legal names but that the officers of these churches may not use the names and symbols of the Episcopal diocese. A third order concerned the expert witnesses put up by both sides. Gergel dismissed three of the breakaway side and one of the Church side. Gegrel's second and third orders of last Thursday were much less important than the first. 

It is hard to overestimate the significance of Gergel's decision. In fact, this is a crucial moment in American jurisprudence. It is the first time a United States (federal) court has ruled on the relationship of the Episcopal Church and its dioceses. The judge declared that the Episcopal Church is hierarchical and protected by the First Amendment that prohibits the civil state from interfering in the internal matters of a religious institution. In other words, the Episcopal Church has the right to decide its own relationships with its dioceses. 

Since Gergel's is the first federal court judgment on this question, it is the law of the land. It is the standard for the future. If the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina appeals Gergel's decision to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Richmond, that court is almost certainly going to validate Gergel, thereby putting an even greater stamp on its authority. At any rate, the American legal standard now is that the Episcopal Church is hierarchical and has the right to govern itself. The importance of Gergel's work last week is enormous, not just for South Carolina, but for the Episcopal Church and the nation.

In fact, Gergel's "first" is really the second "first" in the litigation of the schism in SC. The first "first" was the South Carolina Supreme Court decision affirming the validity of the Dennis Canon. This was the first time any state supreme court in the U.S. had weighed in on this issue. So, two judicial standards have been set: the Dennis Canon is valid, and the Episcopal Church is hierarchical and protected by the First Amendment.

These standards demolish the breakaways' entire legal rationale for the schisms. Before the schisms, the schismatic leaders promised their followers the diocese was sovereign and independent and could withdraw from the Episcopal Church at will and govern itself independent of any power of the Episcopal Church. The SCSC and Judge Gergel have permanently destroyed these claims. The schism in SC was based on false assertions that have now been disproven in the law. The breakaway leaders misinformed and misled their followers. Under the law now, the Episcopal Church is a hierarchical institution, meaning that sovereignty rests in the Church as a whole and not in its separate local parts.

By federal court order, this official seal belongs to the Diocese of South Carolina, a diocese of the Episcopal Church. The court banned the breakaways from using this emblem.

THE AFTERMATH OF GERGEL'S DECISIONS IN THE EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

My observation of the reaction is that people are feeling relief, satisfaction, gratitude, and happiness all tempered by a blanket of fatigue. I have received dozens of emails, and this is what people are telling me. However, there has been no gloating, or spiking the ball in the end zone and no demand for recrimination. If anything, there is still a sadness that this avoidable disaster happened at all.

At Grace Church Cathedral in Charleston yesterday, Bishop Adams spoke about the significance of the court decisions and assured them the diocese intended to press the gains on to the end. There is still a long way to go, but the big hurdles have been scaled. Find the diocese's news release about this here .

THE AFTERMATH OF GERGEL'S DECISIONS IN THE ANGLICAN DIOCESE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

The schismatic diocesan office and some of their local churches made short announcements of Gergel's decision, but all of them tried to spin the news to their advantage. They still want their followers to believe the 29 local churches are not returning to the Episcopal Church and that the circuit court ruled in favor of ADSC on Betterments. 

On Friday, 20 September, the breakaway standing committee met and adopted the name Anglican Diocese of South Carolina. The diocesan office removed all of the Episcopal diocesan names and symbols from their website and Facebook page.

On the Internet, partisans of ADSC fell strangely silent. Only a few people ventured to post comments supporting the schismatics. The import of last week's decisions is obvious to the losing side too. Their disappointment must be profound.

One should bear in mind that the original impetus of the anti-Episcopal Church movement in the 1990's (Anglican Realignment) was political. It was to destroy or severely diminish the Episcopal Church so as to neutralize its liberal influence in American life. The early movement was to tear down, not to build up. It was years later (2008) that GAFCON formed. It was GAFCON that set up, with the American dissidents, the Anglican Church in North America as the homophobic and sexist replacement of TEC in the U.S. If the original goal of the schismatics was to do harm to the Episcopal Church we would have to admit they have accomplished a considerable amount toward that in South Carolina. The Episcopal Church in lower South Carolina is badly battered and bruised. So, in a sense, the breakaways lost the legal war but did much better in the culture war. 

THE STATUS OF THE SCHISM

The Episcopal Church diocese had two big goals in the litigation:  1-retain the identity and rights of the historic diocese, and 2-retain the local parishes under the Dennis Canon. EDSC gained all of the first and most of the second. This was a sweeping victory for the Episcopal Church and its diocese.

The schismatics' goals were to keep the entity of the old diocese and hold together the 50 local churches that went along with the schism. They failed completely on the first and lost most of the second.

The basic legal issues raised by the schism have been settled. What is left is the implementations of those decisions and the tying up of a lot of loose ends. The schism is entering its last phase. Last week profoundly changed the dynamic of the schism in SC.

CHALLENGES FACING THE ADSC

Having lost the old diocese and 29 of the 36 local properties in question, the ADSC faces some huge challenges in the near future. At the moment, it has six local churches (those listed in the SCSC decision and validated by Judge Dickson) and several missions formed after the schism. Its problem is how to build a viable diocese from scratch. They have two big choices as I see it, reconstruct from the ground up, or melt into the ACNA Diocese of the Carolinas, led by Bp Steve Wood, rector of St. Andrew's in Mt. Pleasant. Reconstruction will be daunting to say the least.

As I have pointed out on this blog, ADSC has had and continues to have serious losses of communicant numbers. The trajectory is straight down. When Mark Lawrence became bishop in 2008, the diocese had 27,670 communicants. At the last counting, in 2016, the Lawrence diocese listed 14,694 communicants. Most of the big and famous parishes have also suffered severe losses of communicants:  St. Philip's of Charleston went from 2,677 communicants in 2011, to 1,069 in 2016, a drop of sixty percent. St. Michael's of Charleston fell from 1,847 to 919, a loss of fifty percent. St. Helena's of Beaufort dropped from 1,737 communicants to 880, minus forty-nine percent.

Budgets of ADSC have also struggled just to stay even. The budget today is one-third less than it was when Lawrence arrived. ADSC has just released its 2019 budget online. It shows huge legal expenses, about a million dollars last year and nearly the same this year. Interestingly enough some unidentified person(s) unexpectedly contributed $543,000 to the legal fund this year. Yet, as the budget struggles, Bishop Lawrence gets a nearly $4k raise this year. His package of compensation for 2019 will be $205,023. Counting the rental value of the bishop's residence that he uses free, his full package of compensation is worth around a third of a million dollars a year. Bear in mind Lawrence is 69 years old and eligible to receive generous retirement payments from the Episcopal Church [!] retirement program as well as Social Security.

Lawrence is not the only one getting more money in the budget. The ADSC is paying its parent, the Anglican Church in North America, a whopping $197,800 (up from $196,848 in 2018 and $185,640 in 2017). This four times as much as the old diocese ever paid the Episcopal Church.

The schism in South Carolina was crafted in secret by a relatively small group of people, no more than two dozen. They made the break, then informed the people of it while promising the people they were bound to win the legal war because it was God's will. They assured their followers the diocese was sovereign and self-governing. To prove this, they spent millions of dollars of the people's money. Remember that communicants had to contribute to two sets of lawyers, one for the diocese and one for the local parishes. We do not know how much the ADSC leaders spent on diocesan legal costs, but about a million dollars a year, as they are now claiming, seems about right. Nearly seven years would amount to nearly seven million dollars. One cannot know now what the local parishes have spent on legal costs separately. 

What did the communicants get for their money? Six parishes, a handful of missions, a homeless diocesan bureaucracy, and a needy mother church outside of the Anglican Communion. The faithful of ADSC have now lost the old diocese and the Anglican Communion. This is the result of many millions of dollars of the people's money their trusted leaders spent.

The communicants of the 29 parishes now have to choose which diocese they will follow. What's to decide? Plenty. The breakaways say follow us and we will condemn homosexuality and keep women in submission. The Episcopal Church says follow us and we will give equality and inclusion of gays and women in the life of the church. Human rights is what this whole schism boils down to.

BETTERMENTS

The Betterments lawsuit is still alive. Judge Dickson denied the Church lawyers' motion to dismiss it. (ADSC news release promoted this as a "win" for their side. It was not. Dickson has made no ruling on the Betterments suit.) In this suit, the breakaways say if the Episcopal Church owns the property, TEC should pay the breakaways for "improvements" they made on the property. They mean for the whole value of the property. The Church sees this as a nuisance lawsuit. 

The catch here is that Dickson must implement the SCSC decision on the 29 parishes in order for the Betterments suit to proceed. Even if this suit proceeds, it is most unlikely to hold up mainly because the occupants must have believed they owned the property. The occupants in this case knew very well the Dennis Canon. They knew the Episcopal Church, as beneficiary of the Canon, would become the owner when they disassociated from the Episcopal Church. There is no credibility to the breakaways' assertion they believed they owned the property.

WHAT'S TO MEDIATE?

Certain issues have been settled in the courts and so should not be on the table: the Episcopal Church owns the 29 parishes, the Episcopal diocese owns the historic diocese, the Episcopal diocese owns Camp St. Christopher, and 7 parishes are independent. What does that leave on the table?

From the Church side, the main issues should be how to implement the court orders. Exactly how should the breakaways turn over the 29 parishes? The Church has asked for a Special Master and a full accounting by a professional accounting firm. The breakaways say the 29 have not been settled because Judge Dickson has not ordered an implementation of the SCSC decision. The ADSC lawyers have refused to accept the SCSC decision on the 29.

Thirty-six parishes were parties in the lawsuit against the Episcopal Church. Twenty-nine are to be returned to TEC while six are to be independent. That leaves fourteen local churches in "limbo". They are mostly small mission and historic churches. Only one large church is in this group, Holy Cross of Sullivans Island. The status of these is to be determined and could possibly be part of mediation.

Also to be worked out is the restoration of the historic diocese to the Episcopal diocese. The moment of the schism was noon on October 15, 2012. All of the assets, possessions, and rights of the diocese at that time should belong to the Episcopal diocese. Whatever assets and debts the breakaways independently accrued after that should be their own business. Surely an accounting firm will have to sort out this division, another matter for mediation.

Since the courts have ruled that the 29 parishes and the entity of the old diocese belong to the Episcopal Church side, what about the nearly seven years of occupation? Why cannot EDSC charge rent to the breakaways for use of the Diocesan house, on Coming Street, and the multi-million dollar bishop's residence, on Smith St.? I expect a real estate agent would list rent at $10k/mo. for each. Then there is the question of rent on the 29 parishes. I wonder what a real estate agent would say about St. Philip's and St. Michael's, probably the most valuable properties in old Charleston. $50k/mo. for each sounds reasonable. 

So, on the surface, there does not appear much to discuss, but digging down there really is a great deal to be settled. However, given the history of this schism, I have little to no hope mediation will succeed in resolving the remaining issues of the litigation. I expect this matter will return to Judge Dickson who at age 69 is nearing retirement. If he does issue a ruling, it will be appealed to the SC Court of Appeals.

_________________________________

In case you are wondering about the 14 local churches that followed the schism but did not participate in the lawsuit, they are included among the 17 local churches here. Three of these 17 were established (I am unsure of which ones) after the schism and presumably would remain with ADSC.

Barnwell---Holy Apostles

Berkeley County---Strawberry Chapel

Blackville---St. James

Charleston---St. Andrew's Mission

Charleston---St. John's Chapel

Dillon---St. Barnabas

Florence---Christ Church

Goose Creek---St. James

Grahamville---Holy Trinity

Hagood---Ascension

Marion---Advent

Myrtle Beach---Well by the Sea

North Charleston---Resurrection

North Myrtle Beach---Grace

Orangeburg---St. Paul's

Sullivans Island---Holy Cross

Walterboro---Atonement

A note to readers. Thank you for the emails you sent recently. I try to answer every email asap but now have a backlog. Please keep writing. Your thoughts are important to me. And, if you have any information to contribute about activities of the ADSC and local churches, please send. 

As always, I welcome letters to this editor. This critical moment in the history of the schism is a good time to share your thoughts with all the readers about what is happening in the schism. If you would like to be posted, with or without name, send to the email address above. We want to hear from you.

We also want to hear from The Post and Courier. I have been informed that the P & C has not mentioned Gergel's landmark decision. I did a quick search of the online edition and found nothing about it. The question then is, why is the Charleston newspaper giving the silent treatment to a major federal court decision,  made in Charleston!   

FEDERAL COURT RULES 
FOR EPISCOPAL CHURCH
with addendum, 20 Sept.

19 September.
The United States District Judge, Richard Gergel, issued a decision today entirely for the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of South Carolina and entirely against the breakaway entity. (The Church diocese is now the Diocese of South Carolina, or the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina. The breakaways will have to choose a new name.) 

Read the Church diocese's news release about this here  and here . Read the scepiscopalians report here . My thoughts now upon my first reading of today's court decision:

SUMMARY

Gergel granted every request of the Episcopal diocese and denied every claim of the breakaway group. He found that the breakaways had indeed violated the federal Lanham Act. 

In conclusion, Gergel made gave two major orders:

1-The names, marks, and shield of the pre-schism diocese belong to the Episcopal Church diocese. He numerated these in two groups, national and state. Therefore, titles as Diocese of South Carolina and  Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina belong to the Episcopal Church diocese.

2-Permanent Injunction against the breakaway group against using the names, titles, marks, and insignia that belong to the Episcopal Church diocese.

The major point of the judge's order was that the Episcopal Church diocese is the legal heir of the historic diocese. "This court independently holds that TECSC is the successor of the Historic Diocese since this Court is mandated to accept as binding the decision of the highest ecclesiastical body in a hierarchical religious organization. TEC is a hierarchical church."

COMMENTS

Gergel's 73-page "Order and Opinion" of today is impressive in the breath and depth of its scholarship, intelligence, and language. It is the most thoroughly reasoned and substantiated legal document I have read in a long time. Moreover, it is written in plain English whose meaning is perfectly clear. It is too bad it took six and a half years for us to reach this point.

The judge demolished every claim of the breakaway lawyers. And, he did so with withering evidence citing dozens of cases. There must be a hundred cases named in this document. He also called up the Fourth Circuit twenty times to reference their judgments on similar questions. If the breakaway lawyers appeal this to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Richmond, that court will certainly deny an appeal, and probably toute de suite. Gergel has already done the work of them. Air-tight.

Another very important point that stood out in his Order was his interpretation of the South Carolina Supreme Court decision of Aug. 2, 2017. He particularly recognized Beatty's opinion that the disassociated diocese was not the successor of the historic diocese. Gergel wrote:  "This holding was vigorously litigated in the state courts, was determined by the three-person majority of Pleicones, Hearn and Beatty and was necessary to support the judgment regarding Camp St. Christopher, and therefore is precluded from relitigation...The Court will not disturb this ruling."

Gergel went on to dismiss the notion that how the SCSC justices reached their conclusions mattered:  "The Court therefore is bound by the Justices' actual holding on the ultimate issues, and will not parse, as the Defendants suggest, whether each Justice properly applied All Saints." It is the decisions that matter, not how the justices reached them. That should impress the breakaway lawyers.

Today's ruling essentially ends the litigation of the core issues of the schism. The ownership of the local churches was settled in the SCSC decision. The ownership of the pre-schism diocese was settled today. The Episcopal Church wound up with most of the local churches and with the whole entity of the historic diocese. The Episcopal Church now owns the battlefield of this long, draining, and expensive war. 

However, this is not the end of litigation. There is more to come, probably much more, but it is just mopping up work. The essential issues have been resolved. One may expect the breakaways to appeal today's decision to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. They have virtually no chance there. Mediation starts next week. The topic there should be how to implement the SCSC decision, which has just been affirmed by the federal court. There is no question any more about the state supreme court decision. The breakaway lawyers cannot make any credible case that the SCSC decision does not say what it says. The federal court has just said it does mean what it says.

The end of this legal war is in sight. If the breakaways keep fighting, it is only to put off the inevitable. It is pouring good money after bad. One wonders how long the faithful communicants who followed Lawrence are willing to foot the bills of this disaster. 

At last glance, the breakaway group still has the names and shield on their website. They were permanently forbidden from using such today. They need to take these down from the Internet asap, or it seems to me they could be in contempt of court. 

On this blog, I will follow the court order and refer to the breakaways as ADSC, Anglican Diocese of South Carolina. They are no longer allowed to call themselves Diocese of South Carolina. When they choose a new name, I will follow it.

All of this has been a long time coming, over six and a half years. I always believed this day would arrive even though too often it was hard to keep the faith. Here it is. The day of judgment. For all practical purposes, the outcome of the legal war has been determined. The rest is wrap-up, the sooner the better for everyone concerned.

Finally, this is a moment of satisfaction for the long-suffering Episcopalians, but it is not a time of joy. I think this is a time to thank God for his mercies but also to remember the terrible losses this schism has brought and will continue to bring for some time. Now that the structure of the legal settlement has been set, the task is to bring closure and peace. The good churchpeople of SC are much closer to that today than they were yesterday.
______________________________

Addendum, 20 September, 6 a.m.:

A few thoughts on the morning after.

I have lost count of the people who have written me in protest of my term "Anglican Diocese of South Carolina." There have been five schisms in the Episcopal Church since 2007. Most of them have taken the title "Anglican Diocese of..." and the breakaways in SC are likely to do the same. As so many readers have correctly pointed out, the schismatics are not actually Anglicans. Their parent church is the Anglican Church in North America which is a Christian denomination not part of the Anglican Communion. It is a part of GAFCON, but that is not a function of the Anglican Communion. The dictionary defines Anglican as one in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury. The schismatic groups, as the breakaways in SC, are not in communion with the ABC and are not officially Anglicans. So, readers out there you point is well taken. I will find another term when referring to the SC breakaways.

Also, one should recognize that Gergel's Order of yesterday should greatly influence what is happening in the circuit court. There, the judge, Edgar Dickson, has been reluctant to define the SC Supreme Court decision. Gergel did that for him yesterday: there are majority decisions in the SCSC decision, it does not matter how one "parses" the words, and only the majority decisions matter. It seems to me this is clear direction to Dickson to proceed on and implement the second and third rulings on page 77 of the SCSC decision.  In addition, it seems to me Gergel has undercut the breakaways' case on Betterments. Betterments is based on the assertion that the occupants did not know they did not own the property. Nonsense. They were part of the Episcopal Church. The Dennis Canon was a law of the Episcopal Church. They knew very well the provisions of the Canon. It seems to me Gergel has heavily influenced the direction of the Betterments case in favor of the Church diocese. At least this should strengthen the hand of the Church lawyers as they enter mediation next week.

The breakaways still have the titles and shield up on their website this morning. Gergel issued a permanent injunction yesterday forbidding them from using the names, titles, and insignia of the Episcopal diocese. We will see how long it takes them to follow the injunction. Meanwhile, I hope to see the proper names and insignia on the Church diocesan website asap.

As I said yesterday, Gergel's ruling is a giant step to the end of the litigation. The outlines of the settlement are in sight. The legal war has entered its last phase. What everyone on both sides needs now is closure and peace. This has been a long and terrible nightmare of self-destruction. It is time for the healing to begin. It is time to get on with doing God's work in a world that needs it.

APPROACHING MEDIATION, AGAIN

Mediation is scheduled to begin next week, on Thursday, 26 September 2019, in Charleston. So, the question of the day is, What's to mediate? Let us look at the status of the litigation and the issues facing the two sides as they approach this circuit court-ordered mediation.

My usual disclaimer--not a lawyer, not an official of any diocese, all personal opinion.

First of all, mediation implies adversaries in a dispute can possibly come to a mutually agreeable settlement. This can be done in two ways. In the first, one sides gets it all and the other gives up all. This is unlikely since it contradicts the implied motive of mediation. In the second, each of the two sides gives up something to the other in exchange for a settlement. This is the usual. Thus, the problem at hand is, What can the two sides give up to reach a closing deal?

For what are the two sides of this legal war fighting? The litigation is a proprietary war. Each side essentially wants to own the pre-schism diocese of South Carolina. The war is being fought on two fronts, the entity of the diocese and the local churches. The problem is that the two sides have come at this very differently. They are fighting two different battles on the same battlefield.

The Episcopal Church and its diocese, the Episcopal Church in South Carolina now have two big goals:  
1---get the circuit court judge to implement the SCSC decision of Aug. 2, 2017.
2---get the federal court to recognize TECSC as the legal heir of the pre-schism diocese.

The Diocese of South Carolina has two approaches, plan A and plan B. Plan A is for the 29 parishes (named in the SCSC decision as property of the Episcopal Church) to remain in DSC. To reach this, DSC lawyers are asking the circuit court judge to regard the SCSC decision as unenforceable and to rule, on his own, that the 29 are not property of TEC because they did not create an express trust under the Dennis Canon.

Plan B is the fall back in case the circuit court does follow through on plan A. It is to make TEC pay for the full value of the properties of the 29 parishes. This is the Betterments suit. The full value would be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Thus, the two sides are not even in agreement on the same issues. TEC says the local property issue is settled. DSC says it is not settled (but if it is they want full reimbursement).

Mediation at this point of the schism is untimely. Mediation typically occurs early on in any litigation. This legal war has been going on for six and a half years. Moreover, there have been two good chances of compromise settlement. Both failed utterly. The first was in June of 2015 when the Episcopal Church offered to give the 36 parishes involved in the suit sole ownership of the properties in return for the entity of the old diocese. DSC officers rejected this summarily. The second was in the federal court ordered mediation. In that, the two sides met three times between October of 2017 and January of 2018. The sessions ended with no agreement.

BRIEF REVIEW OF HOW WE GOT HERE

---2013, Jan. 4.  The Diocese of South Carolina sued the Episcopal Church in circuit court.

---2015, Feb. 3.  The circuit court judge, Diane Goodstein, rendered a decision entirely in favor of DSC.

---2017, Aug. 2.  The South Carolina Supreme Court issued a decision overturning part of Goodstein's order. It listed three majority decisions 1-7 parishes were independent of TEC, 2-29 parishes were property of TEC, 3-Camp St. Christopher was property of the TEC diocese.

---2017, Nov. 17.  SCSC denied a rehearing and issued a Remittitur of its decision to the circuit court.

---2018, June 11.  The U.S. Supreme Court denied cert, refusing an appeal of the SCSC decision.

MATTERS BEFORE THE CIRCUIT COURT

In January of 2018, circuit court Judge Edgar Dickson assumed the Remittitur. In time, each side presented three motions or petitions to the judge. 
DSC: -Betterments suit, -complex case, and -Clarification of Jurisdiction (discard SCSC decision). 
TEC/TECSC: -dismissal of Betterments, -Declaratory Judgment and Special Master (implement SCSC decision), and -an accounting of the assets of the other side. Judge Dickson denied TEC/TECSC's motion for dismissal of DSC's Betterments suit. 

This leaves five outstanding motions/petitions in circuit court. 

These boil down to two big issues:  the meaning of the SCSC decision, and payments to DSC for improvements on the properties in question. 

THE MEANING OF THE SCSC DECISION

First of all, a state supreme court is the final word, except if overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. According to Wikipedia, "In the United States, a state supreme court (known by other names in some states) is the ultimate judicial tribunal in the court system of a particular state (i.e., that state's court of last resort). On matters of state law, the decisions of a state supreme court are considered final and binding on state and even United States federal courts."

The state supreme court renders judgment(s) by majority opinion. The South Carolina Code of Laws, Section 14-3-360:  "In all cases decided by the Supreme Court the concurrence of three of the justices shall be necessary for a reversal of the judgment below..."

Here is the last (p. 77) page of the SCSC decision of Aug. 2, 2017. It was written as a summary of the court's work by Jean Toal who as Chief Justice at the time of the hearing on this case. She listed three majority decisions: (click on for enlargement)

To simplify, the TEC/TECSC lawyers insist the three orders mean what they say while the DSC attorneys insist these are conflicted, ambiguous, and unenforceable. In short, TEC/TECSC is asking Judge Dickson to implement the three decisions while DSC is asking the judge to discard the three and rule himself on ownership of the properties of the 29 parishes in question.

In fact, Dickson has enacted the first of the three orders. In the hearing of July 23, 2019, he got the two sides to agree that the 8, actually 7, parishes mentioned in the first item be granted full ownership of the properties.

In a nutshell, the difference between the Episcopal Church side and the diocesan side is the meaning of the SCSC decision. The Church says it means what it says. The diocese says it does not mean with it says.

BETTERMENTS

There are two big issues at stake in the circuit court, the meaning of the SCSC decision and the Betterments suit. In the Betterments suit, the DSC lawyers say that if the Episcopal Church owns the properties (which they argued they did not own in their clarification petition), the Episcopal Church should pay for the improvements the parishes made on the properties. The catch, as I read it, is they are claiming the entire history of the parish. That would mean, TEC would have to pay the whole value of the property.

The TEC side asked the judge to dismiss this suit, but Dickson refused. He denied TEC's motion to dismiss.

CONCLUSION

So, back to our original question, What's to mediate? It is hard to discern what if anything can be up for compromise agreement. The local church properties have been settled by law. The SCSC decision is the law of the land. Seven parishes get sole ownership of their properties. Twenty-nine parishes are now property of the Episcopal Church. The ownership of the old diocese is on the docket of the federal court in Charleston (although the SCSC gave a majority opinion that TECSC is the legal heir of the old diocese). 

The issues at hand really belong in the courts. They are up to the judges to settle. The circuit court judge has a remitted order from the SCSC. It is his job to implement the state supreme court decision. The federal court judge must decide which side owns the old diocese. These are matters of litigation and not mediation. They belong in the courts, not at the bargaining table.

Everyone involved in the schism and its legal war longs for closure, for peace. Exhaustion hangs over all as a heavy blanket. The problem is how to end this tragedy. Both sides are deeply committed to causes, vastly different ones. Each sees itself as an essential part of a great war for fundamental principles. DSC says it is fighting for biblical truth. TEC says it is fighting for human rights. Thus, each defines its religious mission differently. DSC insists on vertical (individualistic) while TEC holds to horizontal (social gospel) as the essential character and purpose of religion. The deep division in SC makes it exceedingly difficult to see any way mediation of the legal issues at stake could work. Both sides want closure, but not at any cost. 

The conflict comes from the difference between the causes of the schism and the outcomes of the schism. The causes were philosophical while the outcomes were proprietary. The challenge now is how to overcome the causes in order to reach the outcomes. 

My bottom line: I hope for the best but expect this mediation to end as did the earlier attempts.

DSC CLERGYMAN 

HEADING TO EPISCOPAL CHURCH
with addendum, 16 Sept.

Sept. 13:
The Diocese of South Carolina released its periodic newsletter today, 13 September. It contained an interesting note about a clergyman of the diocese taking a post as clergy in an Episcopal Church. The newsletter said that the Rev. David Barr is to become Associate Rector of St. George's Church in Nashville, Tennessee. St. George's Episcopal Church is in the Episcopal Diocese of Tennessee.

David Barr is the son of the Rev. John Barr, a long-time prominent clergyman in the Diocese of South Carolina before and after the schism of 2012. According to online sources, David Barr holds a B.A. from Covenant College, an M.A. in Theology from University of Virginia, and is working on a Ph.D. in Theology in the University of Toronto. Bishop Lawrence ordained him a deacon in August of 2018 and a priest in March of 2019. The ordinations would be valid in the Diocese of SC and the Anglican Church in North America. For the last year or so Barr has been Scholar in Residence of the Cathedral Church of St. Luke and St. Paul in Charleston.

St. George's Episcopal Church is a large parish, on the west side of Nashville, with an impressive plant and program. Check out their Facebook page and their website.

Read the announcement of St. George's rector, the Rev. Leigh Spruill, of Barr's new appointment here  . The new job as Associate Rector is to start on October 1, 2019. Note that Spruill calls it a "clergy call." This indicates Barr will start as a clergyman, not a layman. If it is true that Barr did not attend an Episcopal seminary and is not an ordained clergyman in the Episcopal Church, it will be interesting to see how the Episcopal bishop of Tennessee handles this. I can only guess the bishop has been involved in this appointment.

It is possible Barr's transition from ACNA to TEC could become a model for DSC clergy in the future. Anyway, it will be interesting to see what happens. Is he going to be rushed through ordinations as Episcopal deacon and priest in a few days? Is the Episcopal bishop simply going to accept his DSC credentials of ordination? Is there some other process here? Whatever it is, we will keep an eye on it as it may be applicable in the future for clergy moving from ACNA to TEC.  

There is a process in place in the Episcopal Church in South Carolina for former Episcopal clergy to return to TEC. Three priests who went along with the schism did return to TEC by way of this process. Approximately 100 clergy now in DSC remain on the list of people who have been released and removed from Episcopal holy orders. David Barr was not on this list since he had not been ordained before the schism. 

Many of the 100 or so clergy in DSC are going to have some hard choices to make in the not too distant future as 29 parishes return to TEC. Young man Barr may be wise to set his sights outside of eastern South Carolina. The 100 on the list would be wise to examine TECSC's process of restoration of holy orders in TEC.


Sept. 16:
A person does not have to attend an Episcopal seminary to attain holy orders in the Episcopal Church.

However, the Episcopal Church Constitution and Canons provides clear rules for the reception of clergy from churches in communion with the Episcopal Church and for churches not in communion. The Diocese of South Carolina and its parent the Anglican Church in North America are not in communion with the Episcopal Church. For churches not in communion, processes are spelled out for those in apostolic succession and those not in apostolic succession.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has said he is not in communion with the ACNA and that the ACNA is a separate Christian denomination. The secretary general of the Anglican Communion has said the ACNA is not in the Anglican Communion. The Diocese of South Carolina is in an independent denomination outside of the Anglican Communion. 

Any Episcopal bishop would be expected to adhere to the TEC C and C when transitioning any new clergy into his or her diocese. 

The TEC House of Bishops meets this week in its semi-annual session. The process of merging schismatic clergy into TEC dioceses should be a topic of conversation. 

JUDGE DICKSON OFFICIALLY DENIES
TEC/TECSC MOTION TO DISMISS 

DSC'S BETTERMENTS SUIT

Judge Edgar Dickson has issued an "Order Denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint." This happened on Monday, 9 September 2019.

Recall that Dickson had announced his intention of such on 28 August, a week before mediation sessions between the adversaries were to begin in Charleston. Moreover, the judge invited the DSC attorney, Alan Runyan, to submit a proposed order for Dickson to use. Why Judge Dickson chose to announce his decision at that time, a week before mediation, remains a mystery. Likewise, why he chose to have the plaintiffs' lead lawyer compose it instead of writing it himself is a mystery. Dickson gave no explanation of either decision. 

We know from court records that Runyan submitted his "Proposed Order/Dismissal" to Judge Dickson at 10:26 a.m. on Monday, September 9. The proposed order itself was not posted on the court website, only the receipt of the order. An hour and a half later, Dickson released his official "Order..." Although we cannot know with certainty, it seems safe to assume that Runyan's proposed order became Dickson's official Order.

You may read Dickson's Order online. South Carolina circuit court documents are generously provided on the Internet. To reach the papers in this case, go to  publicindex.sccourts.org/dorchester/public index. Once there, click "Accept," then put in Case # 2017CP1801909, and click "Search." On the next screen, click on the first Case Number. Next, click on "Actions." The Documents are on the far right in reverse chronological order.

There are two case numbers concerning the schism. 2013CP1800013 is the original suit and its train.

The main point in Dickson's six-page Order concerns timeliness. TEC/TECSC said the Betterments suit had not been filed within 48 hours of the final decision. The judge declared it had since the Nov. 17 denial of rehearing and Remittitur had been the final decision. On this, it is interesting to note that the judge implied the South Carolina Supreme Court decision was final:  However, an opinion of the South Carolina Supreme Court is not final until the remittitur is sent... (p.4). The whole point of the Church's case is that the SCSC decision of Aug. 2, 2017 is final. Finally, the judge seemed to draw a distinction between owning the property and having trust control of the property. Actually, as I read it, the majority of the SCSC ruled that ownership of the 29 parish properties had moved to the Episcopal Church because the local congregations had violated the terms of the trust set up in the Dennis Canon, to which they had acceded. Once they broke the trust by declaring secession from the Episcopal Church, the Church became the owner of the property as the beneficiary of the trust. 

Most hopeful for the DSC side is the judge's reminder on page 3:  The Amended Complaint prays that the resolution of the issues in this case awaits this Court's decision on motions filed in the remitted case concerning the parish plaintiffs' "accession" (agreement) to the Dennis Canon as well as the Plaintiff Diocese's property interests. I interpret this to mean Judge Dickson takes seriously DSC's claim that he has the right to decide on the disposition of the property of the 29 parishes. This has been the main point of Runyan's case all along. TEC/TECSC maintains Dickson does not have the right to rule on the property issue because this was settled in the SCSC decision of August 2, 2017.

At the time Dickson announced he would deny TEC/TECSC's motion for dismissal, the DSC side declared victory. They insisted the judge had ruled for them. Actually, Dickson only denied the Church motion. He did not make any decision on Betterments. He only allowed the DSC suit to continue. He did not rule on the suit itself. Thus, in the future, he could very well rule against DSC in its Betterments suit. Of course, if he rules in favor of DSC, he would be recognizing that the Episcopal Church owns the properties in question. 

It seems to me that, on the whole, Judge Dickson is leaning to the DSC side. He has made only three decisions in this case, all favorable, or potentially so, to DSC:   1-in the hearing of July 23, 2019, he got the lawyers of the two sides to agree that the seven parishes listed in the SCSC decision as independent, be officially recognized as such;   2-in the hearing of July 23, he ordered mediation;   3-on 9 September he dismissed TEC/TECSC's motion for dismissal of DSC's Betterments suit. 

One should remember that the SCSC sent a Remittitur Order to the circuit court on Nov. 17, 2017. Judge Dickson was assigned the Order in January of 2018. That means for nineteen months, he has not implemented any part of the SCSC decision favorable to the Episcopal Church. The only part he has implemented was to the benefit of the secessionists. His job is to put into effect the SCSC decision. He has done that for only one small part of the decision.

The new date for the first session of mediation is 26 September 2019.

I will return soon with a review of the issues at hand on the approach of mediation. 

SIX YEARS

Today is September 11, 2019. We all know what 9-11 means. Everyone who was alive on September 11, 2001, will never forget that day. At the time I was assistant head of the South Carolina Room of the Charleston County Library, on Calhoun Street, in downtown Charleston. What I recall now the most was the eerie quiet of the day. Few patrons aimlessly roamed the library as the staff congregated around the television in the lounge whispering words here and there. I left when the first tower collapsed. I moped about for hours until my wife joined me and we walked the few blocks to St. Luke and St. Paul, on Coming St., for a 5 p.m. service. As I recall, the dean, William McKeachie read the Great Litany with the large congregation assembled.

I will remember 9-11 today in my own quiet way. My local church is having a memorial service, and I know many other churches are offering the same. Nearly 3,000 people lost their lives on that day of madness, and the world changed in ways we are still trying to assess. I encourage you to keep in mind and heart the memory of that day eighteen years ago.  

This just happens to be the day I started this blog six years ago (no connection to 9-11-01). My goals then were to impart information about the ongoing schism in the old Episcopal Church diocese of South Carolina and to keep people posted on my progress in compiling a scholarly history of the schism. I finished writing the book four years later. It was published in August of 2017. Not one word of that book has been disputed by anyone. All of the criticism has been stylistic. I would like to think that many years from now people will know in detail what happened in the schism.

I have spent a great deal of time and effort on maintaining this blog and have enjoyed doing so. In the six years, I have posted app. 550 entries (535 still up). In all, there have been over 658,000 "hits" on my blog, half of those coming in the last year and a half. My blog was slow to start, but when it caught on, hundreds of people began checked in on it every day. I believe they were looking for information and opinion on what was happening in the schism.

This is borne out by the numbers of hits blog entries received. Here are the 15 most popular entries, from most popular down:

1- Chronology. 13,576 hits.  This is a detailed time line of events of the schism. I try to keep this up-to-date. 

2- Cert Denied.  12,770 hits.  6-11-18.  On the U.S. Supreme Court's denial of cert to DSC's appeal of the SCSC decision.

3- The Beginning of the End.  7,218 hits.  8-26-17.  On the effects of the SCSC decision of Aug. 2, 2017.

4- A Remarkable Bishop, A Remarkable Three and a Half Years.  5,490 hits.  9-1-16.  A tribute to Bishop Charles vonRosenberg.

5- Breaking News, SC Supreme Court Renders Decision.  3,091 hits.  8-2-17.

6- Sources.  2,517 hits.  A bibliography of the sources relevant to the history o the schism.

7- Spin Cycle.  2,119 hits.  8-1-18.  On Bishop Lawrence's Last Hurrah tour.

8- Post and Courier Confused.  1,827 hits.  My criticism of the P & C editorial on the schism.

9- Going Out.  1,714 hits.  On Bishop Lawrence's address to the diocesan convention.

10- The Confederacy and the Independent Diocese.  1,677 hits.  7-10-15.  On the historical parallels of the two.

11- Announcement of Chuck Murphy's death.  1,611 hits. 

12- The Latest Membership Statistics.  1,597 hits. 10-9-17.

13- My Letter to the Post and Courier.  1,522 hits.  11-20-17.

14- The Documents of the Episcopal Church's June 2015 Offer of Compromise Settlement.  1,395 hits.  8-17-18.  Documents disproving DSC's claims the offer was illegitimate.

15- Reality Setting In.  1,266 hits.  10-8-17.  On the effects of the SCSC decision.

The "Letters to this Editor" feature proved to be remarkably popular with blog readers. For these, the gold medal goes to the Rev. Rob Donehue, 2,793 hits (7-2-18). The silver goes to Wayne Helmly, 2,307 hits (9-10-18). The bronze goes to "anonymous," 1,213 (6-30-18). All of the letters were widely read. I always encourage people to send letters to the editor, and, if appropriate, I will post with or without name attached.

On several occasions, my blog entries became news themselves as they were picked up by national outlets. Early this year, this blog broke the news that St. Philip's Church, in Charleston, was billing the (Episcopal) Church Insurance Company of Vermont for coverage of legal expenses. Soon thereafter, the Episcopal Church diocese took legal action against CIC-V. We are now awaiting negotiations between the Church lawyers and CIC-V (postponed from last week). I cannot take the credit for discovering St. Philip's action. The tip came from a reader who simply read the church's annual report online and alerted me.

On another occasion, this blog revealed that, in December of 2017, the independent Diocese of South Carolina circulated a private "Template" to local congregations guiding them on their relocations as the 29 parishes returned to TEC. Again, I cannot take credit for discovering this secret document. More than one reader alerted me to it.

On yet another occasion, Bishop Zavala, of Chile, visited the independent diocese in May of 2015 and indicated he had the support of the Archbishop of Canterbury. I contacted the office of the ABC about this and was informed that the ABC had not sanctioned Zavala's visit and remarks.

I get many emails from readers and I appreciate each and every one. This blog is really a community effort and would not be the same without incoming information from people all over the place, some from outside SC. Thank goodness for the several indispensable lawyers (not involved in the litigation) who very generously guide this layman on legal matters. I would be lost in the legal weeds without them.



Finally, here are some reflections on looking back over the six years of this blog. I ask myself today, what has impressed me the most about what has happened in the last six years, or how do I see things differently now than I did six years ago? 


--- Six years ago, I did not think the non-resolution of the schism would go on so long. The schism occurred seven year ago next month and yet it remains unresolved. There is no closure even after many millions of dollars have been spent on legal fees. 


--- I under-estimated the depth of the determination of the DSC leadership to fight the legal war to the last-ditch, bitter end. In Pittsburgh and San Joaquin, the secessionist officers honorably accepted the decisions of the state supreme courts and ended their legal wars. In both cases the state supreme courts refused to accept appeals of the lower courts that had ruled for TEC. In South Carolina, the state supreme court accepted the appeal and ruled in favor of TEC yet the breakaways refused to accept the supreme court decision. They insisted it did not say what it said. They are fighting its implementation now in circuit court.

The officers of DSC have had several opportunities to bring peaceful closure to the schism and have rejected every one. In June of 2015, TEC offered a very generous settlement of swapping diocese for the 36 parishes. DSC officers flatly refused the offer. There was a period of "mediation" from October of 2017 to January of 2018. It went absolutely nowhere as DSC rejected TEC's request for a protocol of visits to the 29 parishes. As far as anyone knows, DSC has rejected every offer of settlement while making no offer of its own.

One should bear in mind that the original goal of the reactionary "Anglican Realignment" movement in the 1990's was the destruction, or severe diminution, of the Episcopal Church because of its "liberal" policies. I think this helps us understand what has happened in South Carolina in the seven years and why DSC seems committed to a total war against the Episcopal Church.


--- I am disappointed in the courts. The circuit court of Judge Diane Goodstein rendered a decision so over-the-top that the state supreme court ridiculed it out of the room upon arrival. The circuit court of Judge Edgar Dickson has been sitting on the SCSC decision for twenty months. His assigned task was to implement the SCSC decision. He has not done so. Instead, he has ordered "mediation" which I, for one, see as inappropriate and redundant. 

The federal courts have been scarcely better. For years, Judge Weston Houck refused to proceed with the case before him even though the U.S. Appeals Court twice ordered adjudication. Judge Richard Gergel now has the case and has done nothing on it, at least that we know about, in the last eight months. Justice delayed is justice denied. 


--- My theory of the causes of the schism has been borne out by the events of the past six years. The schism was a counter-revolution against the TEC reforms of equality for and inclusion of homosexuals and women in the life of the church. In 2015, DSC institutionalized homophobia in its "Statement of Faith" which was required by oath across the board in the diocese. DSC also joined the Anglican Church in North America which, in addition to opposing human rights for homosexuals, excluded women from places of authority. ACNA is a strict patriarchy in which power rests with the all-male bishops. Since the schism, DSC has affirmed its commitment to homophobia and sexism.


--- Lastly, I have been most impressed by the devotion of the long-suffering Episcopalians of lower South Carolina. Thousands of them were forced out of their beloved church homes by the intolerant reactionaries. These intrepid people sought refuge wherever they could find it, bar-be-que restaurants, funeral homes, old schools, boat docks, borrowed churches, old offices, living rooms, you name it. Innocent victims of the schism, they refused to become victims of history. They refused to be vanquished. They refused to abandon human rights. They refused to give up the faith. They are my heroes of this story and I am greatly inspired by their courage and resolve. They must know that there will be resolution of the legal issues one day. In many cases, they will return to the churches that the state supreme court has said belong to them. There will be closure even if it is farther off than we first thought. It will happen. After all of this sad mess is over, they can look back in honor and say they fought the good fight for God, their fellow human beings, and the Episcopal Church. 

THE LATEST MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS

The Episcopal Church recently released their new membership statistics for last year, 2018. Find it here . The overall news is that TEC membership continues its long-term decline, down to 1,835,931 "active baptized members" in the year 2018 (1,676,349 in the domestic dioceses). This means that TEC is about half as large in terms of membership as it was at its height a half century ago, in 1967.

For the Church diocese in eastern South Carolina, the Episcopal Church in South Carolina, the story is the opposite. TECSC has seen constant and significant growth since the schism of 2012. Here are the official statistics of TECSC's "active baptized members":

2013 --- 5,781

2104 --- 6,387 (+ 5%)

2015 --- 6,706 (+5% 2014-15; +16% 2013-15)

2016 --- 7,053 (+5% 2015-16; +22% 2013-16)

2017 --- 7,309 (+4% 2016-17; +26 % 2013-17)

2018 --- 7,587 (+4% 2017-18; +31% 2013-18)

In summary, TECSC has grown in membership every year since the schism. As of last year, it was about a third larger than it was at the time of the schism, five years before. Thus, TECSC has seen significant growth in the post-schism period even while the national church has lost members every year.

The membership statistics of the schismatic diocese, the Diocese of South Carolina, tell an opposite story. The latest official figures of DSC are from 2016. Since then, the diocese has refused to post its membership statistics, thus we have no information on 2017, 2018, or 2019. Here is what we do know about DSC's membership from the posted data. These figures are for the 50 local churches that adhered to DSC in the schism of 2012. ("Communicant" is defined as a parishioner who attends church at least once a year):

2011 --- 21,993 communicants

2013 --- 17,798 communicants (-19% 2011-13)

2014 --- 16,351 communicants (-8% 2013-14; -26% 2011-14)

2015 --- 15,556 communicants (-6% 2014-15; -29% 2011-15)

2016 --- 14,694 communicants (-6% 2015-16; -33% 2011-16)

In summary, DSC lost communicants every year since the schism. As of 2016, the diocese was a third smaller than it had been five years earlier, before the schism. Thus, DSC has seen significant, relentless, decline in the post-schism period.

When Mark Lawrence was consecrated bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina, in 2008, DSC as a whole listed 27,670 communicants. Eight years later, the entity called DSC listed 14,694 communicants. This was a decline of 47%. In his first eight years as bishop, Lawrence presided over a diocese that lost nearly half its communicants. In practical terms, this drastic decline meant fewer people paying proportionately more to support the diocese at the same time as paying two sets of lawyers, one for the parish and one for the diocese. As communicant numbers declined, expenses soared.

As I showed in my blog posting of February 16, 2019, the five schisms in the Episcopal Church (2007-2012) have resulted in significant, even startling, losses of membership in the departing entities. Find the posting here . The schismatic dioceses of Pittsburgh, San Joaquin, and South Carolina have seen serious and continuous declines in communicant numbers since their schisms. 

In South Carolina, some of the individual parishes lost large numbers of communicants between 2011 (the last year before the schism) and 2016 (the most recent year of statistics):    St. Helena's, of Beaufort, -49% (1,737 to 880);   St. Michael's, of Charleston, -50% (1,847 to 919);   St. Philip's, of Charleston, -60% (2,677 to 1,069);   Christ Church, of Mt. Pleasant, -65% (925 to 328);   Old Saint Andrew's, of West Ashley, -54% (962 to 446);   Holy Comforter, of Sumter, -65% (525 to 183). These numbers came from the official data provided by DSC.

In conclusion, the totality of the membership statistics suggests:

1. The schism in South Carolina was not overwhelmingly popular, as DSC claimed and continues to assert.

2. Members fled, and are still fleeing from DSC churches. New members are moving into TECSC churches.

3. DSC is in relentless annual decline. It has lost significant numbers every year since the schism. TECSC is in annual growth.

4. The social goals of the leaders of the schism in SC were to declare homosexuality sin and to keep women submissive to men. These have not resonated with the public in SC.

5. The schismatics' claim that "liberal" religion, i.e. horizontal, would decline by its own nature while "conservative" religion, i.e. vertical, would naturally grow has been disproven by the post-schism membership statistics. Data show that the reactionary counter-revolution against TEC in South Carolina and the other four schisms has failed to gain popular support.

In my history of the schism in SC, I emphasized that the schism was from the top down. It was a revolt of the diocesan leadership against the Episcopal Church directly resulting from the leadership's opposition to TEC's reforms of equality for and inclusion of homosexuals and women into the life of the church. The schism in SC was not the result of a popular uprising of the people in the pews. The post-schism membership statistics bear out my theory of the schism. If it had been a populist revolt, the membership figures would be in the reverse. All of this suggests our conclusion should be that the leadership of DSC bears the primary responsibility for the clearly declining state of the schismatic diocese.

MEDIATION MEETING POSTPONED

The Episcopal Church in South Carolina's diocesan office informed me today that the first meeting of the mediation has been postponed. On July 23, Judge Edgar Dickson ordered mediation between the independent diocese and the Church diocese. The first meeting had been scheduled for Wednesday, 4 September, in Charleston. Also, the TECSC's lawyers' meeting with the Church Insurance Company of Vermont's officers, in New York, on 5-6 September has been postponed. Presumably, new dates for the meetings will be announced after Hurricane Dorian has passed.

The latest (2 Sept., p.m.) spaghetti models indicate the eye of  Dorian will probably move northeasterly and parallel to the South Carolina coast, and remain in the Atlantic Ocean. However, this is an exceptionally powerful hurricane, and as all of us know, these storms are ultimately unpredictable. Coastal SC (called the Low Country for good reason) is making preparation for the worst, as it should.

I will keep readers posted as I receive new information about legal actions of the schism.

For the moment, let us focus on dealing with the destructive side of Mother Nature. All of our thoughts and prayers should be with the people of the Bahamas and with the people of the coastal southeastern United States who are most likely to be affected negatively by the hurricane. My daughter and son-in-law in Florence SC are hunkered down for the duration (FLO is 70 miles inland from Myrtle Beach). As a native Floridian, I know all too well what tropical cyclones can do. It is best to be prepared.